Anti-Hero: Lack Of Conventional Heroic Qualities in Intelligence Agencies

We are all familiar with the term “intelligence agency,” a term that is surrounded by controversy and darkness. When it comes to intelligence agencies, they can be identified as government-funded organizations with the sole objective of protecting state interests both from foreign and domestic threats. Such organizations or outfits operate in various environments and scenarios covertly, where highly trained operatives both from the agency and hired operatives from various military special operations units work together in multiple clandestine operations. When governments want some work done outside the constitutional framework and international legal system with the sole purpose of protecting national interests, then intelligence agencies come into play.

In recent years, intelligence outfits like RAW, CIA, ISI, MOSSAD, etc. have come into public view surrounded by controversies, but one thing all of us really need to understand is that the purpose of intelligence outfits is never to fight for justice; their sole purpose is to protect their respective state’s national interests by any means necessary. Just recently, RAW came into the limelight for its involvement in various assassination attempts on Sikh separatist leaders within Canada and the United States. I mean, sure, it’s a huge mess for the Indian Foreign Affairs Ministry and the intelligence community since their mass clandestine global assassination program has become public, but the fact that other nations are acting in a way that what India did is something out of the norm or barbaric is pure hypocrisy considering how intelligence outfits like the CIA, MI5, and various other western intelligence agencies have been involved in multiple covert paramilitary operations in third-world periphery nations where they even target unarmed civilians.

Countries such as Pakistan, a vital strategic ally of the United States facing internal strife, are also targets of foreign meddling, with organizations such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operating clandestinely inside Pakistan and contributing to the political unrest in our country. If we were to pick one outstanding example, it would have to be the extensive drone program run by the CIA, which resulted in clandestine drone strikes in areas such as the former FATA.

There is a view within the public that the intelligence agencies should work within the legal framework and should be the generic good guys. Sadly, if agencies were to work like your generic good law enforcement officers, then, in my opinion, there is no point in having an intelligence outfit in the first place.

There are no good guys or bad guys in the intelligence community; there are only people working within grey areas with the sole purpose of protecting national interests. I mean, sure, at times such intelligence outfits work to protect their own interests under the cover of national interest, and yes, in such instances, the government should launch investigations and monitoring groups to identify and arrest the rogue elements, but regulating intelligence outfits similar to law enforcement agencies is not the ideal solution. The work of intelligence agencies is different from that of law enforcers on so many levels, and for them to be monitored and regulated, a new set of rules must be established that are compatible with regulating intelligence organizations.